Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 NOVEMBER 2018

Federal Circuit Patent Update - November 5, 2018

WilmerHale
WilmerHale
Contributor
WilmerHale

WilmerHale

WilmerHale's London office was established more than 40 years ago. With lawyers qualified in the...

View firm profile
Explore more from WilmerHale

GOPRO, INC. v. CONTOUR IP HOLDING LLC [OPINION] (2017-1894, 2017-1936, 11/1/18) (Reyna, Wallach and Hughes)

United StatesIntellectual Property

Precedential Opinion

  1. GOPRO, INC. v. CONTOUR IP HOLDING LLC [OPINION] (2017-1894, 2017-1936, 11/1/18) (Reyna, Wallach and Hughes)

    Reyna, J. Following rehearing, vacating Board decision in IPRs related to action sport video cameras and remanding. The instituted grounds used a sales catalog as prior art. During the IPR, the patent owner challenged the prior art status of the sales catalog because the trade show at which it was distributed was "open to dealers but not the public." In its final written decisions, the Board concluded that the petitioner "had not met its burden to show that the [catalog] was disseminated or otherwise made available to the extent that persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art and exercising reasonable diligence could have located it." The Court disagreed fining that the sales catalog qualified as prior art. "When direct availability to an ordinarily skilled artisan is no longer viewed as dispositive, the

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from